How should we understand the change that Paul makes in quoting Psalm 68?

Explanation:

When Paul quotes Psalm 68:18 in Ephesians 4:8, we notice that he makes three changes to the psalm. The most important change is that he alters the verb to receive to its antonym, to give. Thus, the ESV translation of Psalm 68:18 states, You ascended on high, leading a host of captives in your train and receiving gifts among men. Paul has it not that the one who ascends receives gifts but that he gives gifts. So how do we account for these grammatical changes that turn out to be noteworthy from an interpretive perspective? Most likely, when Paul presents Psalm 68:18 he is presenting a Jewish interpretation of the psalm as recorded in the Targum, and not the original Hebrew.

In order to preserve their language, the Jews developed a translation of the Hebrew Bible into Aramaic in the first century BC. These Aramaic translations were known as Targum, and the translator would sometimes render the translation as an interpretation.⁴ When we look to the Targum on Psalm 68:19 (the Targum labels the psalm’s heading as verse 1) we find the following interpretation, You ascended to the firmament, O prophet Moses; you captured captives, you taught the words of Torah, you gave gifts to the sons of men. ⁵ What is important to notice is that the Jews interpreted Psalm 68:18 in light of Moses’ going up Mount Sinai to receive the law and his teaching it to the people. Thus, they alter the verb to receive to to give.

Most likely, Paul knew the Targum interpretation of Psalm 68:18, and since it suited his argument closer than the original Hebrew, he leaned on the Targum version in Ephesians 4:8.⁶ Thus, we can see why Paul’s quote is slightly different from the original Hebrew of Psalm 68:18.

Counterargument:

The problem with this argument is that the oldest extant Targum on the Psalms dates to the fourth or fifth century AD. Of course, we also have evidence that by this time, Paul's interpretation of Psalm 68:18 as Christological was widely accepted. Thus, it is just as likely that the Targum represents a polemic against the Christian interpretation of Psalm 68:18 than that it contains an original interpretation that influenced Paul.⁷ In other words, given that the earliest extant versions of the Targum date to the fourth or fifth century AD, there is no way to know whether Paul was referring to the Targum, or that the Targum writers were responding the Paul’s interpretation.

Response to counterargument:

Unfortunately for this counterargument, the Targum is not the only Jewish document that interprets Psalm 68:18 as Moses’ ascending to receive the law and afterward giving it to the people. For the Midrash on the Psalms, dating to the first or second century AD, reflects the same interpretative tradition. Interestingly, the Midrash retains the verb to receive but interprets the Hebrew preposition bet as for. On this rendering, the one who ascends receives gifts for men. ⁸ Like the Targum, the Midrashic interpretation has it that Moses is the one who ascends and receives the law, which he gives to the people.⁹ Given that Paul refers to what is written and that two ancient Jewish sources see it that the one who ascends gives gifts, it is likely that Paul has the traditional Jewish interpretation in mind. Interestingly, the Midrash interpretation does not alter the verb to receive.

Explanation:

We want to know why Paul’s quote from Psalm 68:18 has slight variations from the Hebrew original. Most likely he leans on a traditional Jewish interpretation, as captured in the Targum, of Psalm 68:18. We can deduce this because it is not uncommon for New Testament writers to refer to the Targum interpretation of a text when it suits their case. ¹⁰ For example, in Romans 12:19, Paul quotes from Deuteronomy 32:35, writing, Vengeance is mine, I will repay. Here, Paul’s quote aligns more closely with the Targum than with the original Hebrew. And Mark and John also seem to refer to Targum interpretations in their accounts (Mark 4:12; John 12:41). ¹¹

Counterargument:

Even if it is the case that New Testament writers sometimes reference the Targum, there is no reason to think that Paul does this in Ephesians 4:8. For he is writing to Greek Gentiles in Asia Minor (Ephesians 2:11; Ephesians 3:1; Ephesians 4:17), and there is no reason to expect that they would know there exists an Aramaic Jewish interpretation of the Psalms. ¹² So why would Paul refer to something that the Ephesians would not recognize?

Response to counterargument:

There is a problem with this counterargument. For it could be that the Targum interpretation of Psalm 68:18 is a good interpretation. For that interpretation might be based on the Midrash interpretation, in which there is no substantial alteration of the text. Rather, they simply interpret the Hebrew bet as for instead of among, or from (see argument 1, response to counterargument). It is possible that this is a valid interpretation of the Hebrew, and since Paul was trained under a traditional Jewish interpretation, he simply paraphrases Psalm 68:18 in line with this traditional view as presented in the Targum. Now, according to this counterargument, Paul would not refer to a source that was unknown to his audience. But if he believes that the Targum interpretation accurately reflects Psalm 68:18, then he is not quoting from a source that his audience would not know, but he is paraphrasing an Old Testament text that his audience would know so that it aligns with what he thinks is the best interpretation.

Possible weaknesses:

The one weakness of this view is that when Paul says, therefore, it is written, it implies that he is about to quote Scripture. Of course, neither Jewish Midrash nor the Targum is on par with the Old Testament. So, either this view has to admit that when Paul says, therefore, it is written, he does not have the Old Testament in mind, or we have to take it that Paul believed Psalm 68:18 could properly be rendered with to give instead of to receive. For if Paul altered the text for his purpose, this view collapses into interpretation 2.

Explanation:

When Paul quotes from Psalm 68:18 there are subtle differences between his quote and both the Hebrew and Greek renderings of the text in the Old Testament. The most notable difference is the fact that Paul replaces the verb to receive in the original with the verb to give. Thus, in Psalm 68:18, God is portrayed as ascending and then receiving gifts, while Paul has it that Christ ascends and then gives gifts. Why the change?

Most likely, Paul decided to alter the text slightly in order to suit his theological argument. He wants the church in Ephesus to understand that after Christ conquered sin and death, he gives spiritual gifts in order to build up the church. At the same time, Paul has already explained that God raised Christ from the dead and seated him far above all rule and power (Ephesians 1:20–21). Thus, Paul sees a connection between the overall theme of Psalm 68:1–35, which has to do with God’s triumphing over his enemies, and the triumph of Christ. ¹⁵ So Paul uses the psalm with a slight alteration to solidify the notion that Christ is seated high above all else, and that he gives spiritual gifts for the unity of the church. Of course, this is not the only time that Paul alters a text in order to make a theological point. For example, Paul quotes from Habakkuk 2:4 in Galatians 3:11 and Romans 1:17, and in both instances he leaves out the possessive pronoun his. Also, when Paul quotes from Deuteronomy 30:12–14 in Romans 10:6–8 he makes seemingly dramatic changes. Still, in both cases the alterations are consistent with the meaning of the original text so there is no alteration of meaning.¹⁶

Counterargument:

There are two problems with this argument. First, this view takes it that Paul alters the verb to receive to to give from Psalm 68:18, and then refers to the fact that Paul alters Habakkuk 2:4 and Deuteronomy 30:12–14 to show that such alteration is not uncommon for Paul. The problem is that the supposed change to Psalm 68:18 is more dramatic than the changes Paul introduces to Habakkuk 2:4 and Deuteronomy 30:12–14. That is to say, Paul alters Habakkuk 2:4 in the sense that he drops a possessive pronoun, but this hardly changes the meaning of the original. Similarly, when Paul introduces Deuteronomy 30:12–14 in Romans 10:6–8, he seems to apply the Deuteronomy 30:12–14 to the notion of righteousness by faith. In so doing, he does not alter the text in any obvious fashion other than to leave out some terms that are not relevant to his application.

On the other hand, Paul does seem to deliberately change the meaning of Psalm 68:18 from the notion that God receives gifts from men to the notion that God gives them. Now, there may be other times that Paul alters a text to suit his theological argument, but Galatians 3:11, Romans 1:17, and Romans 10:6–8 are not suitable examples to support this.

Second, we have evidence of a tradition of Jewish interpretation that takes it that Psalm 68:18 has to do with Moses’ receiving gifts in order to give them to men. Thus, we have a traditional Jewish interpretation of Psalm 68:18 that aligns with Paul’s presentation of the text so that there is no need to infer that the text was altered in any significant way.

Explanation:

When Paul quotes Psalm 68:18 to explain that Christ ascends on high and gives gifts to men, he has in mind not only verse Psalm 68:18 but all of Psalm 68:1–35. Thus, it is not that Paul alters Psalm 68:18 but that he offers us a paraphrase of verse Psalm 68:18 in light of the overall theme of Psalm 68:1–35.¹⁷ An inspection of Psalm 68:1–35 shows that the psalm has to do with the Lord’s glorious victory over his enemies. The conquered kings bring gifts for the Lord (Psalm 68:29), and the whole world is called to worship the Lord (Psalm 68:31–32). The Lord also distributes power and strength to his people (Psalm 68:35). The themes of God’s triumph and the Gentiles' worshipping God are themes found in Ephesians (Ephesians 1:15–23; Ephesians 2:11–22). ¹⁸ Thus, when Paul explains that Jesus gives spiritual gifts for the upbuilding of the church, he has Psalm 68:1–35 in mind, so he paraphrases verse Psalm 68:18 in light of the whole message of the psalm to make this point.¹⁹

Counterargument:

The problem with this argument is that the connection between having the whole theme of Psalm 68:1–35 in mind and altering the verb to receive to to give, is not at all clear. In other words, the issue at stake is why Paul alters the verb to receive, found in the Septuagint and Hebrew Bible, to to give. If we read the whole of Psalm 68, indeed, we find a psalm that exalts the triumph of God over his enemies. And of course, knowing that Christ is God and seeing that he conquered death on the cross, we can deduce parallels between the triumph and exaltation of God presented in Psalm 68 with the triumph and exaltation of Christ. Still, we want to know why Paul altered the verb to receive to to give, and there does not seem to be any reason from the overall theme of Psalm 68 that Paul should make this change. Thus, the fact that Paul has the overall theme of Psalm 68 in mind may be true, but it does not explain why Paul alters the verb to receive to to give. In fact, a close reading of Psalm 68 suggests that a major theme in Psalm 68 is the exaltation of God. Since God is the one being exalted, it is more intuitive to think that the gifts are given to God than that God gives them. So there is a sense in which the overall theme of Psalm 68 goes against altering the verb to receive to to give.

Explanation:

When Paul introduces Psalm 68:18 in Ephesians 4:8 he uses the phrase therefore, it says. The phrase suggests that Paul is inferring something from what he wrote previously. So what did he write previously? In Ephesians 4:7 he says that grace was given to each of us according to the measure of Christ’s gift, and therefore, it says follows. In other words, it is because Christ gives gifts that Psalm 68:18 says that he ascended and gave gifts to men. Thus, Paul notices that Psalm 68 anticipates the ministry of Christ.²⁰

Counterargument:

The issue with this argument is that Psalm 68:18 does not say that he gave gifts, but that he received gifts. Thus, the argument that Paul uses therefore, it says to signal that Psalm 68:1–35 anticipated Christ giving gifts to men is not applicable unless we also take it that Paul is free to alter the text of a psalm to support that the psalm anticipates Christ. Interestingly, Paul does see that Psalm 68 finds its full expression in Christ, because in Ephesians 4:9 he explains what it means that Christ ascended, in relation to Psalm 68:18. So we can take it that Paul sees the fulfillment of Psalm 68 in Christ. Still, it is not clear that because Christ gives gifts to men, the psalm says that he gives gifts, because the psalm does not say that he gives gifts, but that he receives them.

Further, that Paul uses the phrase therefore, it says carries no special significance except to introduce Scripture. In other words, we can just as easily render the phrase as God says, or Scripture says. ²¹ The fact is, Paul uses several expressions to denote when he is about to quote Scripture, including Scripture says, God says, and Isaiah says. ²²

Possible weaknesses:

The weakness of this view is that when Paul changes the verb to receive to to give, he alters the meaning of Psalm 68:18. This view is not able to explain what motivates Paul to do this. Simply noting that a psalm anticipates the work of Christ is not enough to explain why Paul alters it.